ACCUMULO-1678 -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:00 PM, John Vines <[email protected]> wrote: > That's right, Michael. > > > Also, agree > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Michael Ridley <[email protected]>wrote: > >> This sounds like a good approach to me. >> >> (Long time listener, first time caller - my understanding is that I can't >> vote but I can comment..,yes...?) >> >> Michael Ridley >> Sent from my mobile. >> Pardon any spelling errors. >> >> On Aug 26, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Since we're on git now... to avoid confusion like this in the future >> > (not just from PMC/committers who may not have touched the code in >> > awhile, but also from users looking for the source)... >> > >> > I think it would be useful to do what Thrift did, and replace the >> > existing source branches in SVN with a README >> > (https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/thrift/README?view=log). The SVN >> > history will still be there, and people will still be able to >> > reference tags, just like with thrift >> > (https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/thrift/tags/thrift-0.8.0/?pathrev=1419982 >> ). >> > >> > I'm personally in favor of removing all of >> > {trunk,branches,contrib,tags} with a README, but if people insist on >> > {tags} remaining behind, I'd settle for replacing only the other >> > three. (Technically, the tags are still there... at the version they >> > were created... which is the only reliable way of referencing a tag in >> > SVN anyway... so that's why I don't mind removing them in SVN HEAD). >> > >> > To make things easier on passers-by, we can document in the README, >> > the last commit that occurred in SVN, and provide a viewvc link >> > directly to that, and can also provide the svn command to check out >> > that revision. >> > >> > Removing these paths from the SVN will help resolve any confusion >> > about where our current development activity is taking place. >> > >> > -- >> > Christopher L Tubbs II >> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 8:14 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks Josh. >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> >> From: "Josh Elser" <[email protected]> >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 8:09:36 PM >> >> Subject: Re: SVN or GIT >> >> >> >> No, SVN is not an option for main Accumulo development. >> >> >> >> The CMS site is still hosted on SVN, that's why the SVN info is still >> >> there at all. It could possibly be trimmed some more -- I forget where I >> >> left it. >> >> >> >> On 08/21/2013 08:05 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> Have not committed anything in a while. I read the GIT WIP wiki page. >> Is svn still an option at this point, or do I need to move over to git. >> What's the latest? >> >> >> >> >>
